The Mark of Controversy: Was Mikel right?

So, whilst it's no longer news that controversial referee Mark Clattenburg is engulfed in another player assault row having been accused by Southampton of allegedly "insulting" [verbally assaulting] their forward and England international Adam Lallana, does this perchance lend credence to the allegation that he "racially assaulted" Chelsea's Obi Mikel just a season ago?

Whereas The FA and the Professional Game Match Officials Limited(PGMOL) say the official "has no case to answer", I just thought I might ask to get your own opinion(s) on this latest dismal spat; especially as Southampton now say:

"Under the circumstances we do not feel it appropriate for Mr Clattenburg to officiate in any of our matches until this matter is properly resolved."

Do you think Southampton should do a Chelsea, forgive Clattenburg and let this row just ride for the sake of peace and honour for our prestigious league?

Or you reckon this episode, in this age of CCTV and when GCHQ routinely spies on us...and goal-line technology and so on, brings to the fore the need to record and publish what footballers say to referees, and vice versa?

Use your social login to comment on front page articles. Login using you Facebook, Twitter, Google or LinkedIn accounts and have your say!

Your Comments (oldest first)

Mark Clattenburg is arrogant and is different from other referess in the sense that he replies back when being badgered by players. He probably said something in the incident concerning Mikel, but I don't think it was racist. We went overboard with our case against Clattenburg. Lallana thing only reinforces the belief that Clattenburg isn't shy at lashing out verbally and arrogantly at players. He has been cleared of wrongdoing, but Saints want to pursue further. Not really sure how that's going to help. Last season we had the whole referee's union against us after the Mikel incident, plus our season fell off the rails soon after, thankfully we resolved it, club have to be given credit for it.

He was never proved to not have said those things. Conveniently, as no record of communication between the officials was kept, it was a case of insufficient evidence, and he got off. Did he use improper language with Mikel? From this latest incident with Lallana, and what he pulled with Bellamy before, it is almost certain that he did; whether racist or not, he called Mikel and in all likelihood Juan Mata too something that flies in the face of propriety. It's sad that officials are exempt from any sort of oversight whatsoever.

why is he the only ref being accused? why isn't Howard Webb as shietty as he can be? not even Riley and mike dean have been accused, why is it clattenburg at all times? he is going to be accused of another stupid comment before the season ends and we'll see "mother hen FA" waive it away as a ploy against the man

At the height of the Mikel clattenburg gate i made comments along the lines of what Care states above. In Rubgy the voice mikes that the refs wear record everything. That changed the interactions between players and officials considerably and positively despite that sport being innately more physical and violent. The truth is the FA does not want the referees to be accountable and that is the only reason on the earth why the mic communications are not recorded for post match review if needed. As long as that is the case players will never be able to substantiate or win any he said, who said scenario. Sadly southhampton will pay a dear price for even making this public because the referees have this band of brothers mentality like cops..they generally close ranks even around "dirty" members so you can be sure South hampton will not be getting any favorable calls on any 50/50 situations this season. Mauricio Ponchettino has already started complaining about this but it wont change a thing. They should have learnt from our situation and just kept their collective mouths shut about this. I personally feel there is something about Clattenburg that causes him to be recurrently accused of this sort of thing. Carefree mentions three high profile cases we know of now that he has bee accused of in the last few years..for me that is no coincidence but till the FA decides to change its policy there is nothing clubs can do about this an complaining publicly will only get said club more punishment.

My understanding is it was Ramires that heard what Clattenburg said and despite Clattenburg being cleared Ramires has not changed his mind about what he believes he heard. Ironically, the FA used Ashley Cole's evidence that he (Cole) had not heard Clattenburg say anything wrong to clear Clattenburg. This is ironic because in the John Terry case the FA chose not to believe Cole's evidence and as a result found Terry guilty. Seems like they believe Cole when it suits them.

Cookie Policy
At Vital Football, we along with most other modern websites use small files called 'cookies' to create the most secure, effective and functional website possible for our users. Without these files our business model, based on advertising, breaks down and we would be unable to continue to provide the services that you are here to utilise. By continuing to use this website after seeing this message, you consent to our use of cookies on this device unless you have disabled them. For full details please read our Cookie Policy which can be found here. However, if you would like to disable cookies on this device, please view our Cookie Policy which contains an opt-out tool for disabling advertising cookies. Please also visit our information pages on 'How to manage cookies' if you would also like to block all other types of cookies. Please be aware that parts of this site will not function correctly if you disable cookies.